C6Z06 Intake and Tune compared to 996tt
#136
12-25-2008, 03:12 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Woodbridge Virginia
Posts: 510
Rep Power: 59 
Dont forget the Z06 weighs only ~3100 lbs. That would be a big factor along with the aerodynamics at the high end. If its just flashed K16 turbo then you are comparing a ~430 whp turbo vs a ~445 whp z06 which weighs almost 400 lbs lighter.
Off topic ....I did race a tune only 335i with my fully stock k16 turbo...i was dead even with him till 130mph. That makes me want to go and get a k24 kit sooner than i planned for. This race results makes sense because both the cars weigh pretty much within 40lbs..and put out about 360-380 whp and the results show.
I dont have the videos to prove , but have driven a GIAC flash only turbo and a stock Z06 back to back. I feel the Z06 is much faster and will pull on the p car by a couple or more car lengths.
I will have some videos made with my friends car soon as the weather gets better. But a hybrid turbo vs a tuned Z06 ...is a different story...i think a turbo has a good chance of pulling ahead. My friends car dynoed 500 whp with a tune and intake. So its possible for a 550-590 whp K24 hybrid turbo car to make up for the extra weight and pull on a Z06.
Off topic ....I did race a tune only 335i with my fully stock k16 turbo...i was dead even with him till 130mph. That makes me want to go and get a k24 kit sooner than i planned for. This race results makes sense because both the cars weigh pretty much within 40lbs..and put out about 360-380 whp and the results show.
I dont have the videos to prove , but have driven a GIAC flash only turbo and a stock Z06 back to back. I feel the Z06 is much faster and will pull on the p car by a couple or more car lengths.
I will have some videos made with my friends car soon as the weather gets better. But a hybrid turbo vs a tuned Z06 ...is a different story...i think a turbo has a good chance of pulling ahead. My friends car dynoed 500 whp with a tune and intake. So its possible for a 550-590 whp K24 hybrid turbo car to make up for the extra weight and pull on a Z06.
#137
12-25-2008, 05:25 PM
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Socal
Age: 46
Posts: 1,215
Rep Power: 80
Exactly my point!
#138
12-25-2008, 07:22 PM
I kind of figured that!
It's all good, man!
I agree with you, who in their right mind leaves anything stock?! haha
I know I can't do it!
It's true that when mods are thrown into the mix, especially with two different types of vehicles, it makes a true comparison a bit foggy, and on the street, it is usually "run what you brung" anyway, so everyone needs to come prepared.
Every time I see a 996TT or 997TT on the road, I wonder if it has been modded to any degree.
I also agree we should try to remember that this is all in good fun, which is what this whole car hobby is about anyway.
Seriously, I am just thrilled to have built and tuned my car to be able to hang with some of the quicker guys on this forum.
There is a sense of accomplishment that comes with it.
Now my next goal is to hit the low 6's on pump gas with a bit of tweaking to my car, which of course, I started to do over the last two days! hehe!
Won't run it again til spring, but that's OK.
Pardon my rambling!
Merry Xmas, all!
#139
12-25-2008, 10:24 PM
.Scott, what are some other stock C6Z 60-130 times?
#140
12-25-2008, 11:47 PM
I have seen several ZO6's at sealevel do about 420 rwhp. I have seen stock TT's do 370whp. These numbers are irrelevant because dynos are all different. I have seen videos and heard of several TT's that had only a tune beat stock ZO6's. Never saw one in person and I would not be surprised that under the right circumstance, the ZO6 had a chance as well.
However, I am sure that for the same year the TT was faster and if you wanna compare beans to beans, then compare an 03 ZO6 to an 03 x51. There is no comparison.
#141
12-26-2008, 12:02 AM
Yes, I do believe a flashed TT will beat a stock C5 ZO6. I don't think it will beat a C6 ZO6, (new body style ZO6 came out in 06). Btw, the new body style "normal" C6 came out in 05 (I had a 05 Z51 M6).
#142
12-26-2008, 02:56 AM
A bone stock 996TT historically runs a high 11/low 12 60-130. With a flash, high 9's or low 10s. That's a long way off from a 7.X.
As far as other 60-130 times, not many stock C6Z owners have measured them. Joetwint ran a 8.6 I believe, and my best runs so far have been 7.86, 7.98, 7.99, 8.15 and 8.16. All of these with 2-shifts.
I'm confident the 60-130 time on Jamie's 10.9 1/4 mile run run was somewhere in the 7's as well.
Anyway, having owned and raced both (the 996TT at many different levels of modification)...I still stand by my assertion that it will take, on average, K24's or better, a quality flash and proper exhaust for a 996TT to run with a stock C6 Z06...assuming the Z06 driver can drive his car.
I'm confident that I would've made a lot of modified 996TT owners extremely unhappy were they to ever run across me on the street in my Z06 when it was stock. And Jamie would flat make them cry.
But then, my extremely modified 996TT was on a whole other level.
Last edited by Divexxtreme; 12-27-2008 at 02:55 AM.
#143
12-26-2008, 06:35 AM
A tuned TT is a quick car.
As it appears, weight reduction can be a big help.
You did remove quite a bit of material, etc., to get the weight down.
This, along with no exhaust backpressure and higher boost levels.
Your car seems to be a bit quicker than most with your level of tune and mods.
I agree that the average TT is going to probably need upgraded turbos, etc, to hang with a stock C6 Z06.
I agree with Scott that any very low 11/high 10 C6 Z06, like Jamie's, is in the same mid to upper 7 second range in the 60-130.
The numbers just add up that way, especially with near 130 traps.
Regarding the 2003 C5 Z06 vs the 2003 996TT x51, I believe a capable driver could run the Z06 to a high 11 @ 117mph or so.
It's been done with a 2002.
I don't know what the x51 would run.
I think it might trap higher by a couple mph.
I do think the x51 would pull harder in a highway roll by virtue of the turbos, no questions asked.
You're also talking about 50 extra hp, too.
Stock for stock, the win would probably go to the x51.
#144
12-26-2008, 06:40 AM
I look forward to seeing what your Z06 is going to do.
It should be very rewarding, to say the least!
It should be very rewarding, to say the least!
#145
12-26-2008, 06:48 AM
Exactly.
A tuned TT is a quick car.
As it appears, weight reduction can be a big help.
You did remove quite a bit of material, etc., to get the weight down.
This, along with no exhaust backpressure and higher boost levels.
Your car seems to be a bit quicker than most with your level of tune and mods.
I agree that the average TT is going to probably need upgraded turbos, etc, to hang with a stock C6 Z06.
I agree with Scott that any very low 11/high 10 C6 Z06, like Jamie's, is in the same mid to upper 7 second range in the 60-130.
The numbers just add up that way, especially with near 130 traps.
Regarding the 2003 C5 Z06 vs the 2003 996TT x51, I believe a capable driver could run the Z06 to a high 11 @ 117mph or so.
It's been done with a 2002.
I don't know what the x51 would run.
I think it might trap higher by a couple mph.
I do think the x51 would pull harder in a highway roll by virtue of the turbos, no questions asked.
You're also talking about 50 extra hp, too.
Stock for stock, the win would probably go to the x51.
A tuned TT is a quick car.
As it appears, weight reduction can be a big help.
You did remove quite a bit of material, etc., to get the weight down.
This, along with no exhaust backpressure and higher boost levels.
Your car seems to be a bit quicker than most with your level of tune and mods.
I agree that the average TT is going to probably need upgraded turbos, etc, to hang with a stock C6 Z06.
I agree with Scott that any very low 11/high 10 C6 Z06, like Jamie's, is in the same mid to upper 7 second range in the 60-130.
The numbers just add up that way, especially with near 130 traps.
Regarding the 2003 C5 Z06 vs the 2003 996TT x51, I believe a capable driver could run the Z06 to a high 11 @ 117mph or so.
It's been done with a 2002.
I don't know what the x51 would run.
I think it might trap higher by a couple mph.
I do think the x51 would pull harder in a highway roll by virtue of the turbos, no questions asked.
You're also talking about 50 extra hp, too.
Stock for stock, the win would probably go to the x51.
I remember when I flashed my K16 car, while it ran considerably better, it was still not impressive on the highway. It ran out of turbo fast. Thats why I believe that a C6Z06 would've killed me. Obviously the 60-130 numbers that Scott posted are evidence. With a flash, you gain about 1.5 to 2 seconds in the 60-130, still not even equal to a stock Z06, but with Hybrids, you gain an additional 2.5 to 3 seconds on top of that.
Mike
#146
12-26-2008, 07:05 AM
I remember when I flashed my K16 car, while it ran considerably better, it was still not impressive on the highway. It ran out of turbo fast. Thats why I believe that a C6Z06 would've killed me. Obviously the 60-130 numbers that Scott posted are evidence. With a flash, you gain about 1.5 to 2 seconds in the 60-130, still not even equal to a stock Z06, but with Hybrids, you gain an additional 2.5 to 3 seconds on top of that.
Mike
Mike
Those bigger turbos are the key.
They just BREATHE!
Did you get your car back yet?!
.
#149
01-27-2009, 08:07 AM
Look at the list, there are a few K16 cars trapping mid 120's, just like the average K24 car, so it's not out of the realm of possibility like maybe you want it to be for a K16 car to beat a stock Z06. We can go through definitions of "walk" all day but if someone wins, that is all they need to say "walked" and has been used as a term in street racing under those conditions for decades.
As for trying to assume that every guy that isnt trapping 127 cant drive, good luck with that one. The guy you mention may not be able to drive if he's trapping 6 mph slower than your car at the same track and 3 mph slower in the same car, but you can still count on one hand, maybe two, the number of stock Z06's that have EVER trapped a 127 or higher. And there are lots of other guys that can drive trapping 122-125.
That same track that I ran 11.7 @ 124, my highest trap speed was several 125's, my buddy in his stock Z who is a consumate street race and at least as good as I am at drag racing I think managed a 119 trap tops when he was stock and a 124 mph when he went back after modding. That was prior to DV's full weight with techart 19's on the car. DV's and lighter wheels (unsprung weight) and there is a good chance I'd have gained a couple mph.
I think you need some time out of your eutopic conditions so you can see what everyone else faces when they go to the strip.
As for trying to assume that every guy that isnt trapping 127 cant drive, good luck with that one. The guy you mention may not be able to drive if he's trapping 6 mph slower than your car at the same track and 3 mph slower in the same car, but you can still count on one hand, maybe two, the number of stock Z06's that have EVER trapped a 127 or higher. And there are lots of other guys that can drive trapping 122-125.
That same track that I ran 11.7 @ 124, my highest trap speed was several 125's, my buddy in his stock Z who is a consumate street race and at least as good as I am at drag racing I think managed a 119 trap tops when he was stock and a 124 mph when he went back after modding. That was prior to DV's full weight with techart 19's on the car. DV's and lighter wheels (unsprung weight) and there is a good chance I'd have gained a couple mph.
I think you need some time out of your eutopic conditions so you can see what everyone else faces when they go to the strip.
#150
01-27-2009, 09:13 AM
I could be wrong but don't most trap speeds on the Z06's go up with DR's, I know Ranger, Jamie Furman and most others trap higher speeds with drag radials. Probably because you can powershift from 1rst to second and use more power that you cant on stock tires.
Here are some fast list folks on DR personal bests.
1--10.831 @ 130.05--1.70---jamie furman ------'06. -----Details
2--10.856 @ 129.50--1.67---Ranger------'06. -----Details
3--10.912 @ 126.32--1.62---Dr.Ron------'06. -----Details
4--11.139 @ 128.68--1.80---dpracing-----'09 -----Details
5--11.222 @ 125.61--1.79---Incon306------'07 ------Details
Same PB on stock tires.
1----10.981 @ 128.90--1.77---jamie furman ------'06. -----Details
2----11.138 @ 127.20--1.76---Ranger------'06. -----Details
3----11.242 @ 122.38--1.68---Dr.Ron------'06. ----------Details
11---11.545 @ 123.16--1.83---dpracing-----'07 -------Details
12---11.557 @ 126.68--1.95---Incon306-----'07 -------Details
Between 2 and 5 mph on the PB'swhich you can likely run a higher trap speed with slower ET's on both.So IMO that is still 126 or less mph trapping car on stock tires.
Here are some fast list folks on DR personal bests.
1--10.831 @ 130.05--1.70---jamie furman ------'06. -----Details
2--10.856 @ 129.50--1.67---Ranger------'06. -----Details
3--10.912 @ 126.32--1.62---Dr.Ron------'06. -----Details
4--11.139 @ 128.68--1.80---dpracing-----'09 -----Details
5--11.222 @ 125.61--1.79---Incon306------'07 ------Details
Same PB on stock tires.
1----10.981 @ 128.90--1.77---jamie furman ------'06. -----Details
2----11.138 @ 127.20--1.76---Ranger------'06. -----Details
3----11.242 @ 122.38--1.68---Dr.Ron------'06. ----------Details
11---11.545 @ 123.16--1.83---dpracing-----'07 -------Details
12---11.557 @ 126.68--1.95---Incon306-----'07 -------Details
Between 2 and 5 mph on the PB'swhich you can likely run a higher trap speed with slower ET's on both.So IMO that is still 126 or less mph trapping car on stock tires.